12/17/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

extreme cases. They can appeal either to the housing inspector, the Housing .Board of Appeals, or to the council. Administrative costs would depend upon violations. If an assumption can be made that 5 percent of the customers . would refuse to comply, the cost would be about $5,000 per year which seems minimal in comparison with the benefits to be received. This ordinance addres- ses council goals and carries with it a strong educational component. Financinq is available for everyone affected with minimal impact on the general fund. Mr. Delay asked if the thrust of this ordinance is to look at the most cost- effective means for additionalenerqy. Mr. Page responded that conservation is the most cost-effective means to the individual and to the rate-payer, as well as being the least restrictive. Mr. Delay stated that there are other conser- vation measures which are marginally cost-effective at this time, and they represent another pool of resources. If they would be done at the same time as the mandatory weatherization, greater benefits could be achieved. Financing those further measures later could be more expensive. He asked if the educa- tional program would identify the measures that qo beyond the requirements, and if the financing would include them. Ms. Reeder stated that they are offering individual home analyses and the financing will cover more than what is covered in the ordinance. Mr. Lieuallen stated that the December 12 memo from Mr. Page to the Mayor and council stated that other financial incentives may be available as well as the EWEB program. He asked for clarification. . Ms. Reeder stated that Bonneville Power Administration may have a program. The money will come to the utilities for conservation. Mr. Page mentioned that discussions have been held regarding rebates, payment to have the work completed, etc. . Ms. Miller stated that tax incentives are also available since people can get a substantial amount of money back for weatherizing. She noted that she had received a letter regarding the timing of the public hearing being held just before the holiday. The ordinance is what the Energy Conservation Policy Board had in mind, and though the public hearing will be available for specific changes, no changes have been made in the program thrust. They have also tried to involve people in the spring and the fall. Mr. Page stated that he has talked with many community groups, and citizen involvement has been substantial for the past 11 months. Mr. Delay noted that the Parks and Recreation Department has carried information in their Leisure Schedule in hopes of receiving more feedback. He feels it would help at the public hearing to summarize the general issues that were raised. He feels that part of the concern may come from misunderstanding. Mr. Page indicated that he would do this and that although the public hearing has been set for December 22, it could be held over. Mayor Keller thanked Mr. Page and Ms. Reeder for their presentations. He asked if Federal representatives from BPA would be attending the meeting also. Mr. Page stated that they have been invited to speak to the council regarding consumer billing credits. If mandatory weatherization seems cost-prudent, then EWEB could get lower wholesale rates. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 7